United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of
Solid Waste and
Emergency Response
Publication 9200.5-008B
November 1990
; :.: :;.v. .-.--, ;;-.-.::>::.'x: '":','::'::,. :-
&EPA History of Superfund
During the 1970s a series of eventsculminating in 1977's Love Canal crisis in Niagara Falls, NY
dramatically brought the problem of hazardous wastes on land to the public's attention. Congress
reacted to the problem of land pollution by passing the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
(RCRA) in 1976 and the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act
(CERCLA) in 1980. With CERCLA began the Superfund program to clean up uncontrolled releases
of hazardous wastes.
A Slow Start
Superfund got off to a rocky start. CERCLA was signed by President Jimmy Carter shortly before he
left office. The incoming Reagan Administration viewed Superfund as a five-year program which
would not be reauthorized and which warranted few resources.
Progress in identifying hazardous waste sites, investigating the sites' threats to human health and the
environment, and cleaning up the worst sites was agonizingly slow in the early years.
Decision-making in the early program was highly centralized and conservative.
Expertise in hazardous waste cleanup was limited, and cleanup technologies were practically non-
existent.
Several Steps Forward
Appointed head of the Superfund program in 1984, Lee Thomas made key decisions to speed up the
program. He lowered administrative hurdles and delegated more authority to the 10 EPA Regional
Offices.
1984 and 1985 saw much activity and many accomplishments in all aspects of Superfund.
One Step Back
Delays in CERCLA's reauthorization severely curtailed Superfund's activities in late 1985 and 1986.
Almost all non-emergency worked ceased as taxing authority ran out and remaining funds were
carefully rationed.
Superfund was finally reauthorized in October 1986.
The nation's hazardous waste problem had proved to be bigger than anyone had realized in 1980.
EPA's dilemma was how to reduce environmental risks from a growing list of increasingly complex
sites in a situation characterized by incomplete knowledge, immature technology, and relentless
pressure on limited resources. Rampant public criticism added pressure and an increased sense of
urgency.
& New Game Plan
In 1989 EPA's new Administrator, William K. Reilly, commissioned a candid evaluation of
1 Supe'ffu'rid which became known as the Superfund 90-Day Study.
The study established a new Superfund strategy. Superfund would:
Use enforcement first to compel private party response;
Make sites safer by controlling acute threats immediately;
Make sites cleaner by addressing the worst sites and worst problems first; and
Develop new technologies for more effective cleanups.
-------
Picking Up the Pace
Superfund's new strategy has brought significant results:
All Superfund sites have been assessed for immediate risk and action has been taken where
necessary.
Work has begun at 86 percent of the almost 1,200 Superfund sites listed on the National
Priorities List (NPL).
Almost 700 projects representing 500 NPL sites are being readied for construction. Each year,
150 projects representing 100 sites join the line.
Roughly 250 cleanup projects are being designed.
Responsible parties are now doing about 60 percent of new cleanups, under EPA supervision.
Treatment technologies are being employed in over 70 percent of the projects to control
hazardous waste sources. ':
Heading for the Finish Line
On November 5,1990, Congress reauthorized Superfund to operate through 1994. EPA views this as
an opportunity to let the recent changes in the Superfund program work.
------- |